Sunday, October 07, 2012

Whose Connectivism?

I would like to make just one point, that it is not "Siemen's 'Connectivism,'"
that he gave a name to a theory and approach a number of us had been
working on for some time. I don't mind saying I borrow the name from
him, but I would certainly say this is as much my theory (and that of
numerous other people) as it is his. Here, for example, are four papers I
wrote before Siemens's 'Connectivism' (which appeared December 12,
2004):

The whole point of connectivism is that the 'great author' theory of
knowledge is wrong. I would never claim to have invented connectivism.
But neither should Siemens be awarded such a claim (and to be very fair, I've never seen
any indication from him that he would make such a claim). We all invented connectivism.

4 comments:

En http://blogcued.blogspot.pt/2012/09/es-el-conectivismo-una-teoria-lo-es-del.html escribí:En la formulación actual de Downes (2012) se experimenta un giro radical aceptando que no solo hace falta que sea el individuo quien en un entorno conectado sea el que establezca enlaces y como resultado se produzca el conocimiento sino que para ello es imprescindible la atribución de significado:I don't want to spend a whole lot of time on this, but I do want to take enough time to be clear that there are, unambiguously, numerous types of meaning. Why is this important? When we talk about teaching and learning, we are often talking about meaning. Consider the classic constructivist activity of 'making meaning', for example. Or even the concept of 'content', which is (ostensibly) the 'meaning' of whatever it is that a student is being taught.

George Siemens coined the term "Connectivism" to characterize which he identified as a new theory of learning in the same way that John McCarthy coined "Artificial Intelligence". Several researchers specially Stephen Downes (connective knowledge) have developed, expanded and proposed new approaches to a new reality in constant change we are living on, so, what is the problem?